Automatic Modeling of Dominance Effects Using Granger Causality

We propose the use of Granger Causality to model the effects that dominant people induce on the other participants' behavioral patterns during small group interactions. We test the proposed approach on a dataset of brainstorming and problem solving tasks collected using the sociometric badges' accelerometers. The expectation that more dominant people have generalized higher influence is not borne out; however some more nuanced patterns emerge. In the first place, more dominant people tend to behave differently according to the nature of the task: during brainstorming they engage in complex relations where they simultaneously play the role of influencer and of influencee, whereas during problem solving they tend to be influenced by less dominant people. Moreover, dominant people adopt a complementarity stance, increasing or decreasing their body activity in an opposite manner to their influencers. On the other hand, less dominant people react (almost) as frequently with mimicry as with complementary. Finally, we can also see that the overall level of influence in a group can be associated with the group's performance, in particular for problem solving task.

[1]  Jean-Marc Odobez,et al.  Using audio and video features to classify the most dominant person in a group meeting , 2007, ACM Multimedia.

[2]  Anil K. Seth,et al.  A MATLAB toolbox for Granger causal connectivity analysis , 2010, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[3]  T. Judge,et al.  Personality and leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[4]  James M. Rehg,et al.  Temporal causality for the analysis of visual events , 2010, 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[5]  David Sloan Wilson,et al.  Cognitive cooperation , 2004, Human nature.

[6]  C. Gold,et al.  Dispositional and situational influences on dominance behavior in small groups. , 1983 .

[7]  Chuohao Yeo,et al.  Modeling Dominance in Group Conversations Using Nonverbal Activity Cues , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing.

[8]  Daniel Gatica-Perez,et al.  Detection and application of influence rankings in small group meetings , 2006, ICMI '06.

[9]  Anil K. Seth,et al.  Causal networks in simulated neural systems , 2008, Cognitive Neurodynamics.

[10]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[11]  Anil K. Seth,et al.  Distinguishing Causal Interactions in Neural Populations , 2007, Neural Computation.

[12]  G. Schwarz Estimating the Dimension of a Model , 1978 .

[13]  Roseanne J. Foti,et al.  A pattern approach to the study of leader emergence , 1998 .

[14]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Meeting mediator: enhancing group collaboration with sociometric feedback , 2008, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[15]  R. Lord,et al.  A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits and leadership perceptions: an application of validity generalization procedures , 1986 .

[16]  A. Pentland,et al.  Meeting mediator: enhancing group collaborationusing sociometric feedback , 2008, CSCW.

[17]  Jean-Marc Odobez,et al.  Investigating automatic dominance estimation in groups from visual attention and speaking activity , 2008, ICMI '08.

[18]  J. Durbin,et al.  Testing for serial correlation in least squares regression. II. , 1950, Biometrika.

[19]  T. Chartrand,et al.  The chameleon effect: the perception-behavior link and social interaction. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  L. Tiedens,et al.  Power moves: complementarity in dominant and submissive nonverbal behavior. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  C. Granger Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross-Spectral Methods , 1969 .

[22]  J. Geweke,et al.  Measurement of Linear Dependence and Feedback between Multiple Time Series , 1982 .